The Politics of the Pandemic

Although the full implications of the COVID-19 pandemic remain to be seen, it is already clear that domestic and international politics will – and must – change to prevent an even deeper disaster. We are entering a brave new world in which "big government" and international solidarity are both unavoidable.

BERLIN – The asteroid has hit, and suddenly everything has changed. But the asteroid that has crashed into our planet is invisible. One needs a microscope, rather than a telescope, to see it.

With COVID-19, the world faces several crises in one: a global health crisis has triggered crises in the economy, civil society, and daily life. It remains to be seen whether political instability will follow, either within countries or internationally. But, clearly, the pandemic has drastically changed life as we know it. While the end of the crisis and its consequences can’t be predicted, certain significant changes can be anticipated.

The crisis is not just complex, far-reaching, and threatening to the foundations of individual societies and the global economy. It is also many times more dangerous and extensive than the 2008 global financial crisis. Unlike that episode, the coronavirus threatens millions of lives around the world, and its effects on the economy are not centered in only one sector.

Around the world, most economic activity has been frozen, setting the stage for a global recession. Apart from the death toll and the stability of health systems, the big question right now is how severe the economic downturn will be, and what permanent consequences it will have.

Similarly, we can only guess what effects the virus will have on already-fragile regions, and particularly on refugee camps. Iran seems to be heading for a major humanitarian crisis, in which the poorest and most vulnerable will be the most affected. Beyond that, it is still too early for any remotely realistic assessment of COVID-19’s humanitarian consequences.

But past experience tells us that major shocks such as this do tend to disrupt political systems and international relations. Western democracies, in particular, may find their governance called into question. The principles of human rights may be pitted against economic imperatives. The pandemic also invites a generational conflict between young and old, and between authoritarianism and liberal democracy.

Subscribe to Project Syndicate

Enjoy unlimited access to the ideas and opinions of the world's leading thinkers, including weekly long reads, book reviews, and interviews; The Year Ahead annual print magazine; the complete PS archive; and more – all for less than $2 a week.

Subscribe Now

And yet an alternative scenario is possible, in which the COVID-19 crisis gives rise to a new solidarity. Lest we forget, an earthquake and tsunami in the Indian Ocean in December 2004 created the conditions for ending the civil war in Aceh, North Sumatra.

In the short term, the countries most affected by the pandemic will become crisis economies: governments will pursue enormous levels of spending and other unconventional measures to prevent a total collapse. The effectiveness of the response remains to be seen. But it is clear that the relationship between the economy and the state will undergo a fundamental change.

In a marked departure from the prevailing wisdom of recent decades, we are already witnessing the return of “big government.” Everyone is looking to the state to inject huge sums of money into the economy, and to rescue (or take over) imperiled companies and sectors that are deemed essential. The state’s massively increased role will have to be scaled back after the crisis has passed, but how to do so is up for debate. Ideally, governments will transfer the returns that come from re-privatization into a sovereign wealth fund, thus giving the public a share in the post-crisis settlement.

Until then, “big government” – whether the European Commission or national authorities – will be expected to prepare for the next disaster. Rather than being caught completely off guard again, it will need to ensure the provision of as essential medical supplies, personal protective equipment, disinfectants, adequate laboratory capacity, intensive-care units, and so forth.

But that isn’t all. The stability, efficiency, capacity, and costs of existing health-care systems will remain a salient issue. The COVID-19 crisis has shown that it isn’t really possible to privatize health care. In fact, public health is a basic public good, and a critical factor in strategic security.

There will also be increased, sustained attention to the pharmaceutical sector, particularly the domestic provision of critical drugs and development of new ones. Many countries will no longer be willing to rely on international supply chains that can easily break down in an emergency.

This is not to suggest that the market economy will be abolished. But the state absolutely will assert itself vis-à-vis the business community, at least when it comes to strategic issues. For example, the crisis will invite a major policy push for digital sovereignty in Europe. Its model will not be that of authoritarian China, but that of democratic South Korea, which has established a digital edge.

So far, however, the EU has not played a prominent role in the global response to COVID-19. This is not surprising. In existential crises, people tend to revert to what they know best, and what they know best is the nation-state. But while Europe’s nation-states certainly can play an immediate crisis-management role, they cannot resolve the crisis.

After all, the single market, the joint currency, and the European Central Bank are the only mechanisms that can prevent an economic collapse and enable an eventual recovery in Europe. The COVID-19 crisis is thus likely to force Europeans “ever closer” together, requiring even deeper solidarity.

What is the alternative? A return to the world where everyone fends for themselves? For EU member-state governments, that would amount to political and economic suicide.

The COVID-19 pandemic is the first crisis of the twenty-first century that truly affects all of humankind. But more crises will follow, and they will not all come in the form of a virus. Indeed, the fast-forward crisis we are now experiencing is a preview of what is yet to come if we do not address climate change.

The only way to manage generalized threats to humanity is through more intensive cooperation and coordination among governments and multilateral institutions. To name but one, the World Health Organization – and the United Nations more generally – must be strengthened at all costs. COVID-19 is a reminder that all eight billion of us are in the same boat.

Support High-Quality Commentary

For more than 25 years, Project Syndicate has been guided by a simple credo: All people deserve access to a broad range of views by the world's foremost leaders and thinkers on the issues, events, and forces shaping their lives. At a time of unprecedented uncertainty, that mission is more important than ever – and we remain committed to fulfilling it.

But there is no doubt that we, like so many other media organizations nowadays, are under growing strain. If you are in a position to support us, please subscribe now.

As a subscriber, you will enjoy unlimited access to our On Point suite of long reads and book reviews, Say More contributor interviews, The Year Ahead magazine, the full PS archive, and much more. You will also directly support our mission of delivering the highest-quality commentary on the world's most pressing issues to as wide an audience as possible.

By helping us to build a truly open world of ideas, every PS subscriber makes a real difference. Thank you.

Joschka Fischer was German Foreign Minister and Vice Chancellor from 1998-2005, a term marked by Germany's strong support for NATO's intervention in Kosovo in 1999, followed by its opposition to the war in Iraq. Fischer entered electoral politics after participating in the anti-establishment protests of the 1960s and 1970s, and played a key role in founding Germany's Green Party, which he led for almost two decades.

Rather than rampantly generating standard meaningless predictions that the world - once again - will never be the same, responsible politicians should instead focus on trying to understand the roots of the problem and what went wrong. If they do so, they will see that it was exactly the big government that has made things worse. Advising now that the big government is the solution to the present and future problems is totally reckless and suggests that the world will remain the same and we all again will be defenseless next time a new peril has emerged.

Leaving aside the issue of China's responsibility for the origins of the pandemic and providing timely statistics, it is obvious that government response in almost every single contry was late, confused and at best timid falling behind events and shying resolve. The big government practically everywhere failed to mount prompt effort to combat the coming threat and sluggishly got to a low-key start long after the enemy had broken our ranks.

At least for decades the big government has been pouring huge money into public health systems depriving economy and people of needed financing, but when a real threat appeared those systems turned out to be helpless and inadequate.

Again, for decades the very same big government has been spending staggering amounts of money on weapons and national security ignoring multiplying warnings about viruses. Now we've got thousands of nuclear weapons, huge stocks of missiles, tanks, warplanes and other arms, but no stocks of such simple things as medicine masks, ventilators and protective clothing to save lives. We've got enormous armies which are nevertheless useless in the face of a war-like situation, lost lives and destroyed economy.

Even in China now praised by some extatic advocates of authoritarianism for her toughness in combating the virus, it was not the government who invented quarantine, but ordinary people who chose to stay home and cut all social contacts fearing for their lives in the absence of needed government guidance. The government there just decided later to follow a well-trodden path.

We've spent a lot, but we haven't got either security or protection. And that is a tragic testimony to a total and complete failure of the big government.

We need other solutions and we will find them in dismantling the big government and replacing it a small government serving decentralised communities.

Joschka Fischer maintains the EU “has not played a prominent role in the global response” to COVID-19. Unsurprisingly, in times of an existential crisis, “people tend to revert to what they know best, and what they know best is the nation-state. But while Europe’s nation-states certainly can play an immediate crisis-management role, they cannot resolve the crisis.” The current health emergency may well be the last straw for the EU to get its act together. According to the author, “the single market, the joint currency, and the European Central Bank are the only mechanisms that can prevent an economic collapse and enable an eventual recovery in Europe.” He believes COVID-19 is likely to force Europeans to come “ever closer” together, and forge “even deeper solidarity.” The other alternative would be a “return to the world where everyone fends for themselves! For EU member-state governments, that would amount to political and economic suicide.”The EU has weathered many a crisis in recent decade, but many fear the coronavirus poses a threat to the bloc unlike previous crises. Leaders are warned that if division prevails, the pandemic will be more destructive than the storms of eurozone bailouts, the migration crisis and Brexit. In a rare intervention Jacques Delors, former European commission president who helped build the modern EU, broke his silence last week to warn that lack of solidarity posed “a mortal danger” to the bloc. Since COVID-19 is a novel virus, much is still unknown about how it progresses, and whether warmer weather would slow its spread. Most of all many wonder what the new reality will be like once the crisis is over. Yet COVID-19 has revealed deep rifts in the EU. Apart from grappling with a global pandemic, Europe is also combating the “Trump virus,” whose “America first” slogan inspires nationalists to follow suit. The myriad crises in recent years had been responsible for the rise of right-wing populism. As a result the European spirit is weaker than it was a decade ago. It is true that in the early phase of the virus spread, Russia and China sent medical supplies to Italy, while its nearest neighbours failed to immediately respond to Rome’s calls for help. But EU countries have since then moved on from their initial “each fending for onself” response, where some imposed export bans on vital medical gear, or set up border controls that left other European citizens stranded. Lately Germany, Austria and Luxembourg have opened their hospitals to take on patients from the hardest-hit countries. France and Germany have donated more masks to Italy than China, according to the EU executive, which trumpeted the statistics on social media amid alarm it was losing “the global battle of narratives” over “the politics of generosity”. While the future of Europe’s economy – on the whole the global economy – remains uncertain, for the moment people just want to have the pandemic under control. There are signs that the public still look up to a leader, who is firm and competent, rational and reassuring. Italy’s far-right leader, Matteo Salvini, has plummeted in the polls, while the popularity of the lawprofessor-turned-prime minister, Giuseppe Conte, has risen. The author says, “in a marked departure from the prevailing wisdom of recent decades, we are already witnessing the return of ‘big government.’ Everyone is looking to the state to inject huge sums of money into the economy, and to rescue (or take over) imperiled companies and sectors that are deemed essential. The state’s massively increased role will have to be scaled back after the crisis has passed, but how to do so is up for debate.”To start with, EU countries remain divided over how to help bring their economy back on track. The pandemic has reopened the wounds of the eurozone crisis, resurrecting stereotypes about Europe's “profligate” southerners and “hard-hearted” northerners. The problem is that each crisis risks to reduce trust between member states and within the whole system. The current crisis may well be a “make-it-or-break-it moment” for the European project. If it goes badly this could usher in the end of the bloc, allowing nationalists and far-right populists to triumph – to Putin’s delight. The author says the current pandemic is the first crisis of the twenty-first century “that truly affects all of humankind. But more crises will follow, and they will not all come in the form of a virus.” He fears that climate change could have a similar devastating impact on mankind, if it is not addressed in time.

New Comment

It appears that you have not yet updated your first and last name. If you would like to update your name, please do so here.

Pin comment to this paragraph

After posting your comment, you’ll have a ten-minute window to make any edits. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.

Mass protests over racial injustice, the COVID-19 pandemic, and a sharp economic downturn have plunged the United States into its deepest crisis in decades. Will the public embrace radical, systemic reforms, or will the specter of civil disorder provoke a conservative backlash?

For democratic countries like the United States, the COVID-19 crisis has opened up four possible political and socioeconomic trajectories. But only one path forward leads to a destination that most people would want to reach.

Log in/Register

Please log in or register to continue. Registration is free and requires only your email address.

Emailrequired

PasswordrequiredRemember me?

Please enter your email address and click on the reset-password button. If your email exists in our system, we'll send you an email with a link to reset your password. Please note that the link will expire twenty-four hours after the email is sent. If you can't find this email, please check your spam folder.